The vedic path offers......

[Guest guest]

I was born in Saudi Arabia. From the beginning of my life, I had many questions that were unanswered in many of the scriptures that I studied. I had studied almost many of the religious paths in this world. I was very much inquisitive about the occurences of birth and death.

 

As time passed on, I had a chance to visit India and meet one of the holy sage in Northern part of India. My mind was immediately captivated by his calm appearence and his loving nature. I stayed with him for 6 years and it changed my entire character and understanding of this world. By his teachings, I learnt who we actually are.

 

From what I have learnt from him, I came to the following conclusion at the end of the 6th year:

 

* From all the religious books that a person can collect, you can nowhere else but only in Vedic books, a complete and clear description of the Supreme Being, His activities, His abode and His pastimes.

 

* You can also get details like how He looks, His spiritual body and how He takes care of his devotees.

 

* How to go to that spiritual abode of Him.

 

* Even though many ignorant people try to bring down, de-mean and destroy this vedic culture, they cannot because it is eternal and is not destructible by anyone. Though it may appear to be destroyed within this world, it is eternal. Whatever and however they attempt to destroy it, it is impossible as it is very carefully protected by Lord Himself. Though people may destroy vedic scriptures that are in the form of books or on any other material, they are very much unsuccessful as the vedas are eternally present.

 

* How to love God when we are in this world

 

* It offers indeed a direct path to self-realization

 

* Vedic Culture does not present God as a Hindu, Muslim or Christian God. ( We can clearly understand that Krishna or Rama or Allah is not a Hindu or a Muslim once we associate with a self-realized sage. It is our material defect which makes us think in such a way)

 

* Followers of Vedic religion do not target others for conversion.

 

* And much more......Just wanted to tell you some of my experiences and realization in search of truth.

 

Cheers

[ethos 0]

Very nice post.

[Guest guest]

Thank you

[Guest guest]

Yes God is not Muslim,Hindu,etc.His living words are eternally present to guide conditioned souls.

 

I liked your post.Take care and God bless ya.

 

Joy

[Gauracandra 1]

Are there any Vaisnava temples in the middle east? I think Iskcon has some in Israel atleast. But I was always under the impression that outside religions aren't allowed in Islamic countries (atleast in the Middle East). Are there any moderate Muslim countries, perhaps like Jordan, that would be accepting of the construction of Vaisnava temples? or is it just too volatile there to even bother.

[Guest guest]

"Yes God is not Muslim,Hindu,etc.His living words are eternally present to guide conditioned souls."

 

Why is God not Hindu? Krishna worships Hindu gods, follows Hindu rituals, and many other things. So God is Hindu.

[Guest guest]

"* Vedic Culture does not present God as a Hindu, Muslim or Christian God. ( We can clearly understand that Krishna or Rama or Allah is not a Hindu or a Muslim once we associate with a self-realized sage. It is our material defect which makes us think in such a way)"

 

Not true. Rama worhsips Shiva making him a Hindu also.

[Guest guest]

After we die,are we still hindu,muslim and other nonsense?

 

Joy

[Guest guest]

Depends on where you go.

[vsdprasad 0]

yes, outside religions are mostly not allowed in islamic countries. You can see this page from the diary of travelling preacher http://www.traveling-preacher.com/tp071202.htm . HH Indradyumna swami had recently been to an arabic country. He describes his experiences there.

 

-Prasad.

[Guest guest]

Yes.There are religious communities in the afterlife also.Bird of same feathers flock together.

 

Joy

[Guest guest]

In the entire spiritual world almost every resident is Hindu. So you are right, birds of the same feather do flock together.

[Guest guest]

Ok I give up.

 

Joy

[theist 1]

Of course the word Hindu is a misnomer. And under that umbrella term *Hindu* we find many schools of thought at odds with each others conclusions.

 

So which *Himdu* are you talking about?

[Guest guest]

I don't know the exact definition of what constitutes a Hindu but anyone who worships a Hindu God such as Krishna, Vishnu, Shiva, etc... is a Hindu. So which type of Hindus are primarily in the spiritual universe? I would guess Vaisnava Hindus.

[theist 1]

How about if we drop the word *hindu* and leave Vaisnavas?

 

Could we say the variegated portion of the spiritual world is filled will Vaisnavas only?

[Guest guest]

As far as I know, there are devotees of Shiva and Durga in the spiritual universe.

 

A Vaisnava by default is a Hindu because a Vaisnava worships Krishna, a Hindu god. So Vaisnava Hindu is not bad in my book.

[Guest guest]

There is conciousness everywhere.In spiritual universe all are but pure conciousness having taken various forms like rivers,trees,human,etc to serve God.

 

In that bond of love there exist no difference.Terms like Hindu/Muslim/Christian are limited to heavenly/hellish dimensions only.

 

Are you not happy to know that ultimately there is no divison only LOVE?

 

Joy

[Manni 0]

i was under the impression that labels such as religion etc are part of the material world and therefore do not migrate into the spiritual world. To say that the spiritual world is "mostly" Hindus is therefore a little incongruent.

 

Anyhow, if they are "mostly" Hindus, what are the minority?

[leyh 0]

Krsna is not a Hindu god. Krsna is God.

[Guest guest]

Hi Everyone,

 

The main reason I wrote my experience above was not to hurt anyone or to condemn any religion. There is a great need to understand the ruth. Please do not limit the capabilities of vedic knowledge by categorizing it under a single name.

 

Note: Even I used to think that I was becoming a Hindu, by associcating with sages of India. However, in the end I realized the truth by His grace.

 

The vedic culture cannot be just termed as 'Hinduism'. It is much more universal in application that merely confining it to a country or religion.

 

Please got through the article that I'm posting below.

 

About The Name "Hindu"

 

By Stephen Knapp

 

Before we get started, I did want to say something about the use of the words "Hindu" and "Hinduism." The fact is that true "Hinduism" is based on Vedic knowledge, which is related to our spiritual identity. Such an identity is beyond any temporary names as Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, or even Hindu. After all, God never describes Himself as belonging to any such category, saying that He is only a Christian God, or a Muslim God, or a Hindu God. That is why some of the greatest spiritual masters from India have avoided identifying themselves only as Hindus. The Vedic path is eternal, and therefore beyond all such temporary designations. So am I calling the name "Hindu" a temporary designation?

 

We must remember that the term "hindu" is not even Sanskrit. It is not found in any of the Vedic literature. So how can such a name truly represent the Vedic path or culture? And without the Vedic literature, there is no basis for "Hinduism." We must also remember how the name "hindu" was first developed. Some sources report that it was Alexander the Great who first renamed the River Sindhu as the Indus, deleting the beginning "S", which was easier for the Greeks to pronounce. This was when Alexander invaded India around 325 B.C. His Macedonian forces thereafter called the land east of the Indus as India, a name used especially during the British regime.

 

Later, when the Muslim invaders arrived from such places as Afghanistan and Persia, they called the Sindhu River the Hindu River. The name "Hindu" was then used to describe the inhabitants from that tract of land in the northwestern provinces of India where the Sindhu River (the modern Indus) is located, and the region itself was called "Hindustan." Because the Sanskrit sound of "S" converts to "H" in the Parsee language, the Muslims pronounced the Sindhu as "hindu," even though at the time the people of the area did not use the name "hindu" themselves. This word was used by the Muslim foreigners to identify the people and the religion of those who lived in that area. Thereafter, even the Indians conformed to these standards as set by those in power and used the names Hindu and Hindustan. Otherwise, the word has no meaning except for those who use it out of convenience.

 

The real confusion started when the name "Hinduism" was used to indicate the religion of the Indian people. The use of the words "Hindu" and "Hinduism" was used frequently by the British with the effect of focusing on the differences between the Muslims and the people who became known as "Hindus". This was done with the rather successful intention of creating friction among the people of India. This was in accord with the British divide and rule policy to make it easier for their continued dominion over the country.

 

Therefore, in any way you look at it, the name "Hindu" started simply as a bodily and regional designation. It is merely a continuation of a Muslim term that became popular only within the last 1300 years. In this way, we can understand that it is not a valid Sanskrit term, nor does it have anything to do with the true Vedic culture or the Vedic spiritual path. No religion ever existed that was called "Hinduism" until the Indian people in general placed value on that name and accepted its use.

 

Unfortunately, the word "hindu" has gradually been adopted by most everyone, even the Indians, and is presently applied in a very general way, so much so, in fact, that now "Hinduism" is often used to describe anything from religious activities to even Indian social or nationalistic events. Some of these so-called "Hindu" events are not endorsed in the Vedic literature, and, therefore, must be considered non-Vedic. Thus, not just anyone can call themselves a "Hindu" and still be considered a follower of the Vedic path. Nor can any activity casually be dubbed as a part of Hinduism, and thoughtlessly be considered a part of the true Vedic culture.

 

The Vedic spiritual path is called sanatana-dharma, which means the eternal, unchanging occupation of the soul in its relation to the Supreme Being. Following the principles of sanatana-dharma can bring us to the pure state of regaining our forgotten relationship with the Supreme Lord. This is the goal of Vedic knowledge. Thus, the knowledge of the Vedas and all Vedic literature, such as Lord Krishna's message in Bhagavad-gita, as well as the teachings of the Upanishads and Puranas, are not limited to only "Hindus," but are actually meant for the whole world. It is also the fully developed spiritual philosophy that fills whatever gaps may be left by the teachings of other less philosophically developed religions. Direct knowledge of the soul is a "universal spiritual truth" which can be applied by all people, in any part of the world, in any time in history, and in any religion. It is eternal. Therefore, being an eternal spiritual truth, it is beyond all time and worldly designations. Knowledge of the soul is the essence of Vedic wisdom and is more than what the name "Hindu" implies, especially after understanding from where the name comes. Even if the time arrives in this deteriorating age of Kali-yuga after many millennia when Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, and even Hinduism (as we call it today) may disappear from the face of the earth, there will still be the Vedic teachings that remain as a spiritual and universal truth, even if such truths may be forgotten and must be re-established again in this world by Lord Krishna Himself. I doubt then that He will use the name "Hindu." He certainly said nothing of the sort when He last spoke Bhagavad-gita.

 

Thus, although I do not feel that "Hindu" is a proper term to represent the Vedic Aryan culture or spiritual path, I do use the word from time to time in this book to mean the same thing since it is already so much a part of everyone's vocabulary. Otherwise, since I follow the Vedic path of sanatana-dharma, I call myself a sanatana-dharmist. That reduces the need to use the label of "Hindu" and also helps focus on the universal nature of the Vedic path. Therefore, I propose that all Hindus begin to use this term of sanatana-dharmist, which not only refers to the correct Sanskrit terminology, but also more accurately depicts the true character and spiritual intention of the Vedic path.

 

I think the above article clears it all.

 

Cheers

[Guest guest]

The spiritual universe is filled with only Hindus. This is not meant to be a sectarian statement. It is simply an objective statement on the basis of descriptions of the spiritual universe.

 

Of course the word Hindu is a misnomer but that doesn't mean we can't or shouldn't use it to describe a set of various faiths, beliefs, or universal way of life. Saying Krishna is Hindu god is academically correct and nothing offensive with that. Ontologically Krishna is the Supreme Personality of Godhead.

[leyh 0]

Dear Guest:

 

I don't think it's offensive to say Krsna is a Hindu god. It's simply incorrect. This is not my opinion, but the opinion of Krsna's pure devotee His Divine Grace A.C Bhaktievdanta Swami Prabhupada:

 

They are attracted to Krsna. These people, they are... (Hindi) But you are taking Krsna as Hindu. That is your mistake. Krsna is... Hindu ne. He is God. He is God. God Hindu ne, Mussulman ne, Christian ne, Parsi ne--God is God. (Hindi) And I am also not interested to preach Hindu dharma. (Hindi) ...Krsna dharma. Krsna consciousness, that is the only dharma. (Hindi) ...Krsna literature. It is not a Hindu dharma literature. (Hindi) (Room Conversation,November 7, 1970, Bombay)

[shvu 1]

 

Leyh,

 

This behooves you/iskcon to explain Hindu_Dharma. If you say there is no such thing as Hindu dharma, then what religion are the millions of Hindus practising?

 

Ontologically, Vishnu/Narayana/Krishna is THE God, as far as Vaishnavas are concerned. Objectively however, Krishna is a hindu God, just like many other Hindu Gods.

 

Mirriam Webster offers the following meanings:

 

Krishna : A deity or deified hero of later Hinduism worshiped as an incarnation of Vishnu

 

Hinduism : The dominant religion of India

 

Hare Krishna : A member of a religious group dedicated to the worship of the Hindu god Krishna.

 

From another dictionary.

 

ISKCON : A religious sect founded in the United States in 1966; based on Vedic scriptures; groups engage in joyful chanting of 'Hare Krishna' ('O Krishna!') and other mantras based on the name of the Hindu god Krishna; devotees usually wear saffron robes and practice vegetarianism and celibacy.

 

Thanks

 

[Guest guest]

To say God is God and not Hindu/Muslim goes even one step further.Srila Prabhupada didn't want vedic way of life to be confused with sectarianism.He didn't preach any religion ONLY how to love Krsna/God.It dosen't matter if you belong to some religion.He simply said take "knowledge" from us.

 

The belief of Hindu God is also correct but less intelligent view of unlimited nature of God.Material world is temporary and so,the things in it.The name Hindu didn't exist 2000 years ago!

 

ys,

Joy